State and Federal Transportation Funding in Minnesota: Long Term Vision Short-Term Challenges Philip Schaffner Peggy Reichert, ACIP Minnesota Department of Transportation 1
Overview Long Range Vision for Transportation Plan updates underway Multi-modal Plan Aviation Plan Highway Investment Plan Highway Plan Update Issues Implications of Vision Funding Outlook Performance Trends Collaboration 2
Minnesota GO Better align the transportation system with what Minnesotans expect for their quality of life, economy and natural environment. Develop a vision i for all forms of transportation. t ti Ownership of the vision is a shared responsibility.
What is a Vision? A description of a desired future Answers the question what are we trying to achieve? Does NOT answer the question how will we do it?
Change?
Change?
Change?
Change?
Challenges & Opportunities Aging g Population Urbanization Energy Shifts Automation Persistent Budget Challenges Health Care Costs Increased Global Competition Changing Work Environments, Telecommunications & Access to Services Floods / Water Quality
A Transportation Vision for Generations
A Transportation Vision for Generations Minnesota s multimodal transportation system maximizes the health of people, the environment and our economy.
A Transportation Vision for Generations The system: Connects Minnesota s primary assets the people, natural resources and businesses within the state to to each other and to markets and resources outside the state and country
A Transportation Vision for Generations The system: Provides safe, convenient and effective movement of goods and people
A Transportation Vision for Generations The system: Is flexible e and nimble enough to adapt to changes in society, technology, the environment and the economy
A Transportation Vision for Generations Quality of Life Recognizes and respects the importance and significance of place not just as destinations, but also where people live, work, learn, play and access services Is accessible regardless of socio-economic status Is accessible regardless of socio economic status or physical ability
A Transportation Vision for Generations Environmental Health Is designed in such a way that it enhances the community around it and minimizes the impact to the environment
A Transportation Vision for Generations Economic Competitiveness Enhances and supports Minnesota s role in a globally competitive economy and the international significance and connections of Minnesota s trade centers Attracts human and financial capital to the state
What This Means Waterways, rail, transitways, roads, airports and pipelines strategically t located to enable critical connections for Minnesota s businesses and communities. An integrated network of streets, roads and highways collectively support freight, mass transit, personal vehicles and non-motorized transportation.
What This Means Reliable and affordable transit options for people who cannot or choose not to operate a personal vehicle. Connected options to walk and bike for everyone choosing active forms of transportation. Zero deaths or serious s injuries occur in any form of transportation.
What This Means An environment that allows safe travel for both an 8 year old and an 80 year old in every neighborhood and community. Technology and innovation improve the safety and productivity of each mode of transportation and may be implemented as an alternative to expanding the physical layout of the system.
What This Means The existing system will change over time to meet future needs and some parts of the current system may no longer be needed in the future.
Guiding Principles Leverage public investments to achieve multiple purposesp Ensure accessibility Build to a maintainable scale Ensure regional connections Integrate safety Emphasize reliable and predictable options Strategically fix the system Use partnerships
Comment Period Comments accepted until Oct. 21, 4:30p Public Hearing Scheduled for Oct. 4, 4-5:30p Details on the hearing and commenting are available at: www.minnesotago.org
The Vision i Will Lead Directly Into the next 20-year Statewide Multimodal Transportation Plan Vision Statewide Multimodal Transportation Plan Modal System & Investment Plans
Statewide Multi-Modal Policy Plan Update 2008 Transportation Plan 20 year outlook, updated every 4 years Incorporate 50 year Vision Build on recent plans Passenger/Freight Rail Plan (2010) Greater MN Transit Investment Plan (2010) Aviation Plan (underway) Strategic Highway Safety Plan Set policies, strategies, performance measures for all modes 23
Highway Investment Plan 2013-32 24
Step 1: Update Investment Needs Investments to meet performance target -bridge conditions -pavement -other infrastructure -roadway fatalities -metro congestion mgt -interregional corridor travel times Traveler Safety $3.1 B 5% + Infrastructure Preservation $16.3 B 26% Mobility $42.6 B 69% Regional & Community Improvement Priorities = $3 to $5 B Investments to Meet Performance Targets = $62 B ($ in Billions, Year of Construction) 25
New Performance Directions Condition of supporting infrastructure ADA compliance Bike and Ped accommodation Importance of Statewide Connections- IRCs Freight movements Metro approach to mobility, access, congestion management 26
Step 2: Project Revenues Federal Reauthorization Funding level Priorities State Revenue Economy Fuel Efficiency Local Revenues 2008: $15 B Property tax Local government aid 27
28
29
30
Federal Surface Transportation Act Reauthorization SAFTEA-LU expired 2009 6 month extension passed this month It is the 8 th time that SAFTEA-LU has been extended Senate supports increased funding House supports live within our means 11
Highway Trust Fund: Receipts and Outlays Discrepancy Total Outlays Total Receipts 53 48 ($ billions) 43 $39.4 38 $35.0 32 33 Actual Estimated 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Note: Excludes $8.017 billion transfer from General Fund to Highway Account of HTF in September 2008; $7 billion transfer from General Fund to Highway Account of HTF in August 2009; $19.5 billion transfer from General Fund to Highway and Mass Transit Accounts of HTF in March 2010. 32
45 40 35 Estimation of Federal Highway and Transit Obligations Through 2017 Based on Current Trust Fund Revenues Highway Obligations $42.0 $42.5 $42.2 $42.8 Transit Obligations $33.5 $34.0 $34.7 $35.4 30 ($ billions) 25 20 15 10 $10.4 $11.9 $11.9 $12.0 $12.8 $7.9 $7.9 $8.0 $8.6 5 $12.2 0 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 33
State Revenue Projections Feb 11 Forecast HUTD Revenue Motor Fuel Tax Revenue $1,671 $1,762 $1,818 $1,844 $1,875 $849 $869 $886 $888 $887 $272 MVST Revenue $321 $339 $348 $366 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Registration Tax Forecast $545 $567 $587 $602 $615 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 34
State Revenue Projections Important Trend: Flat Growth in VMT Statewide Annual Growth Trends Slight decline in VMT 2004 2010 VMT remained flat 2004-2007 despite increases in population and employment Employment decline 2008-2010 due to recession 35
Millions of Units 20 Unit Sales of New Light Vehicles History and Global Insight Forecast (Millions of Units, Annual Rate) 18 16 14 12 10 8 GII Feb'11 GII Dec'10 GII Nov'10 History 6 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 36
Minnesota Federal & State Trunk Highway Program/Plan ($ millions) Annual Program Planned FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 FY2014 FY2015 Actual/Current Estimates Federal Formula Program $525 $529 F1 $615 F2 $626 F2 $525 F1 $525 F1 $525 F1 $525 F1 Less: Central Managed F3 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 District C F4 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 SBPF &SCF F5 80 84 82 93 80 80 80 80 Programmed by ATP's 392 392 480 480 392 392 392 392 Avg 70% MnDOT 274 274 336 336 274 274 274 274 30% Local 118 118 144 144 118 118 118 118 State Trunk Highway 290 290 290 290 290 290 290 290 100% MnDOT ARRA $27B 236 239 30 for Highways 165 167 21 30% Local 71 72 9 Better Roads/State Funds 56 28 25 33 100% MnDOT TED/SAM 17 27 31 100% MnDOT MnDOT Program F6 659 828 890 755 732 714 715 692 Potential Federal Changes Senate at $40B in 2012 570 587 605 623 House at $27B in 2012 400 412 424 437 Based off current revenues American Jobs Act 240 235 25 $27B for Highways est. 70% MnDOT 168 165 17 30% local 72 70 8 F1 Level agreed to program at between MMB and MnDOT until reauthorization or annual appropriation F2 These years are up because Congress did not continue the SAFETEA-LU Earmarking and provided as Federal Formula F3 MPO Planning, Safe Routes to School, State Planning & Research, Coordinated Boarder Infrasctructure and Construction Engineering F4 For projects statewide or not handled through the ATP process F5 State Wide Bridge Preservation Fund and Statewide Cooridor Fund, for projects in an ATP greater then 50 % of the APT's Federal funds in a year F6 District C + SBPF&SCF + Avg 70% MnDOT MnDOT + Better Roads + TED/SAM 37
Other Federal Issues up for Debate National performance measures and targets Consolidate Programs? Focus on investments of national interest Separate freight program? Eliminate current mandatory programs: CMAQ, Safe Routes to Schools Enhancements / Livability? Eligible system 38
Federal Focus: Interstates and NHS? 39
Step 3: Set Investment Priorities for Projected Funding 2008 Considerations Safety, Preservation, Mobility, Community Priorities Balanced Program reflecting: Legislative Direction, System Performance, Stakeholder Input 2012 Considerations Vision- direction for the highway system System Performance Trends Risk Management strategies Federal Direction in Reauthorization 40
Ch 152 Major Bridge Progress Name Location County District Bridge No. Replacement Status DeSoto, in St. Cloud TH23 over Mississippi River & Riverside Dr. Stearns 3 6748 Replacement Complete Robbin-Drayton TH11 over Red River of the North Kittson 2 6690 Replacement Complete Hastings US61 over the Mississippi River, RR, Streets Dakota Metro 5895 Replacement underway Lafayette US52 over the Mississippi River, RR & Streets Ramsey Metro 9800 Replacement underway Dresbach I-90 over the Mississippi River Winona 6 9320 Replacement planned for FY 2012 St. Peter TH99 over the Minnesota River LeSuer 7 4930 Rehabilitation planned for FY 2013 St. Croix River Crossing in Stillwater TH36 over the St. Croix River Washington Metro 4654 Replacement planned for FY 2014 Winona TH43 over the Mississippi River, RR, Streets Winona 6 5900 Cayuga I-35 over Cayuga Street & BNSF RR Ramsey Metro 6515 Sorlie Bridge, E Grand Forks US 2B over the Red River Polk 2 4700 Rehabilitation or Replacement planned for FY 2015 Replacement planned for FY 2010 Rehabilitation or Replacement planned for FY 2018 TH72 over the Rainy River in Baudette Lake of the Woods 2 9412 Rehabilitation or Replacement planned for FY 2018 Red Wing US63 over Mississippi River & CP Rail Goodhue 6 9040 New Ulm TH14 over the Minnesota River Brown 7 9200 Rehabilitation or Replacement planned for FY 2018 Replacement planned for FY 2018 41
100% Statewide Pavement Conditions Actual and Predicted Ride Quality Index (RQI), prior to Better Roads 2009 2014 2020 90% 80% Percent of System Miles 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 4819 miles 4675 miles 4373 miles 3733 miles 3281 miles 2930 miles 20% 10% 0% 416 miles 598 miles 915 miles 574 miles 1060 miles PA Good PA Poor NPA Good NPA Poor 1688 miles 42
Step 4: Develop the Investment Plan Funding levels Priorities Infrastructure Preservation $11.6 B 78% Strategies Major Corridor s - collaborative investment framework Traveler Safety $1.4 B 9% Other $.4 B 2% RCIPs $.6 B 4% Mobility $1.0 B 7% ($ in Billions, Year of Construction) 43
10-year Investment Plan 10-year Investments to address Corridor Needs (2016-2025) Bridge Preservation Pavement Preservation Culvert Preservation Pipe Replacement Safety Improvements Mobility X X X X X X DRAFT Investment Area Project Year Cost Pavement Planned Investments (2012-2015 STIP) TH 71 junction to New London, microsurfacing 2011 $ 1.1 M Safety District Safety plan projects 2012-2015 $ X Bridge/Culverts - - - Mobility Paynesville Bypass 2011 $ 45 M Bikes/Peds - - - Transit - - - Total Objectives Facilitate freight and person mobility between Willmar and St. Cloud Improve safety throughout the corridor Maintain the highway in state of good repair Provide for safe pedestrian and bike access through urban areas Strategies Safety Implement suggested projects in the District 3 and District 8 Safety plans. These include centerline rumble strips, edge lines, and intersection improvements for Highway 23. High Priority intersections at TH 9 (SE of New London), Kandiyohi CSAH 2 Centerline rumble strip: New London to Paynesville Mobility Limit future signals on this corridor Apply access management guidelines to limit future access to the highway Bike/Pedestrian Consider complete streets principles for projects in urban areas Incorporate context sensitive design in highway projects X 44
Step 5: Identify Priorities for Additional Funding- Risk Mitigation Investment Strategy Mn/DOT recognizes we cannot meet performance gaps ($50B) with any foreseeable revenue scenario Using risk assessment to evaluate alternative performance targets, strategies New Metro District & Metro Council Plan - already represents a risk mitigation strategy - $4-6 B to fully implement Determining priorities, levels and sources of additional funding will require further discussion by public, stakeholders, elected officials 45
Highway Investment Plan Major Milestones 46
Additional Information: Philip Schaffner Peggy Reichert AICP Office of Statewide Multimodal Planning Office of Capital Programs and Performance Measures 651-366-3743 651-366-3778 philip.schaffner@state.mn.us Peggy. Reichert@dot.state.mn.us 47